Bridgeport Fittings, Inc

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsOct 13, 1988

291 N.L.R.B. 358 (N.L.R.B. 1988)

358 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Bridgeport Fittings , Inc and Bridgeport Fittings Employees Association Case 39-CA-3028 U S 146 162 (1941) 2 Accordingly we grant the Motion for Summary Judgment 3 October 13 1988 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS JOHANSEN AND CRACRAFT On June 16 1986 the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint alleging that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act by refusing the Union s request to bargain following the Union s certifica tion in Case 39-RD-67 (Official notice is taken of the record in the representation proceeding as defined in the Board s Rules and Regulations Secs 102 68 and 102 69(g) Frontier Hotel 265 NLRB 343 (1982)) The Respondent filed its answer admit ting in part and denying in part the allegations in the complaint On April 4 1988 the General Counsel filed a Motion for Summary Judgment On April 6 1988 the Board issued an order transferring the proceed ing to the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion should not be granted The Respondent filed a response The National Labor Relations Board has delegat ed its authority in this proceeding to a three member panel Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment In its answer the Respondent admits the juris diction of the Board and its refusal to bargain with the Charging Party The Respondent attacks the validity of the certification on the basis of inter alia the labor organization status of the Charging Party the appropriateness of the unit and the Boards disposition of the Respondents objections in the representation caseproceeding All representation issues raised by the Respond ent were or could have been litigated in the prior representation proceeding The Respondent does not offer to adduce at a hearing any newly discov ered or previously unavailable evidence nor does it allege any special circumstances that would re quire the Board to reexamine the decision made in the representation proceeding including the deci Sion denying the Respondents motion for reconsid eration I We therefore find that the Respondent has not raised any representation issue that is prop erly litigable in this unfair labor practice proceed ing See Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co v NLRB, 313 i Bridgeport Fittings 288 NLRB 124 (1988) FINDINGS OF FACT I JURISDICTION The Respondent a Connecticut corporation with an office and place of business in Stratford Connecticut has been engaged in the manufacture and nonretail sale of electrical fixtures In the course and conduct of its business operations during the calendar year 1985 the Respondent sold and shipped from its facility products goods and materials valued in excess of $50 000 directly to points outside the State of Connecticut We find that the Respondent is an employer within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that the Union is a labor organization within the mean ing of Section 2(5) of the Act II ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A The Certification Following the election held August 1 1984 the Union was certified on May 17 1985 as the collec tive bargaining representative of the employees in the following appropriate unit All production and maintenance employees in cluding leaders assemblers light machine op erators general laborers packing and inspect ing general machine operators material han dlers receiver/shippers heavy machine opera tors pot man machine operators and set up and machine operators and set up but exclud ing utilities employees factory clerks shipping clerks inspectors tool crib attendants tooling 2 In its answer the Respondent denies generally pars 10 and II of the complaint which allege that the Union since about April 2 1986 has requested the Respondent to bargain and that since April 10 1986 the Respondent has refused The Respondent admits that it received a letter from Derwin Gonzalez on behalf of the Union requesting bargaining but claims that it lawfully refused to recognize and bargain with the Union because the Union was not lawfully certified as the exclusive representa tive of its employees that it is under no obligation to notify or bargain wi h the Union about wages hours or working conditions that the Union does not exist and that Gonzalez has no legal authorization to speak for or on behalf of the Union The Respondent again argues in its response to the Notice to Show Cause that it is under no legal obligation to bargain with the Union because the certification was invalid and the Union does not exist It also contends that employee turnover and the passage of time since the filing of its motion for reconsideration support its position that the complaint should be dismissed in its entirety or in the alternative that a hearing be conducted The Respondents argument concerning the validity of the certification was already rejected and it proffers no affirmative evidence sufficient to substantiate its claim that the Union has ceased to exist In addition we find that the Respondent s assertions concerning employee turnover passage of time and loss of ma Ionty support lacks merit See Einhorn Enterprises 282 NLRB 248 (1986) enfd 843 F 2d 1507 1509 (2d Cir 1988) 8 We deny the Respondent s request that the record in the represents tion proceeding be reopened as well as its request that it be allowed to amend its answer to the complaint 291 NLRB No 54 BRIDGEPORT FITTINGS technicians printers draftsmen maintenance clerks hydraulic specialists tool room machin fists electricians tool makers tool and die makers tool and die specialists mold repair foremen the materials control clerk the mate pals coordinator the materials buyer the tele phone operator the administrative clerk the warehouse inventory clerk accounting clerks purchasing buyers billing clerks the payroll clerk the registered nurse the computer oper ator office clerical employees and guards other professional employees and supervisors as defined in the Act The Union continues to be the exclusive repre sentative under Section 9(a)of the Act B Refusal to Bargain Since April 2 1986 the Union has requested the Respondent to bargain and since April 10 1986 the Respondent has refused We find that this re fusal constitutes an unlawful refusal to bargain in violation of Section 8(a)(5) and (1)of the Act CONCLUSIONS OF LAW By refusing on or after April 10 1986 to bargain with the Union as the exclusive collective bargain ing representative of employees in the appropriate unit the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act REMEDY Having found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(5)and (1) of the Act we shall order it to cease and desist to bargain on request with the Union and if an understanding is reached to embody the understanding in a signed agreement To ensure that the employees are accorded the services of their selected bargaining agent for the period provided by law we shall construe the Ini tial period of the certification as beginning the date the Respondent begins to bargain in good faith with the Union Mar Jac Poultry Co 136 NLRB 785 (1962) Lamar Hotel 140 NLRB 226 229 (1962) enfd 328 F 2d 600 (5th Cir 1964) cert denied 379 U S 817 (1964) Burnett Construction Co 149 NLRB 1419 1421 (1964) enfd 350 F 2d 57 (10th Cir 1965) We deny as unnecessary here the General Counsels request for a visitatonal pro vision Cherokee Marine Terminal, 287 NLRB 1080 (1988) ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent Bridgeport Fittings Inc Strat 359 ford Connecticut its officers agents successors and assigns shall 1 Cease and desist from (a) Refusing to bargain with Bridgeport Fittings Employees Association as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the bargaining unit (b) In any like or related manner interfering with restraining or coercing employees in the ex ercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act 2 Take the following affirmative action neces sary to effectuate the policies of the Act (a) On request bargain with the Union as the ex clusive representative of the employees in the fol lowing appropriate unit on terms and conditions of employment and if an understanding is reached embody the understanding in a signed agreement All production and maintenance employees in cluding leaders assemblers light machine op erators general laborers packing and inspect ing, general machine operators material han dlers receiver/shippers heavy machine opera tors pot man machine operators and set up and machine operators and set up but exclud ing utilities employees factory clerks shipping clerks inspectors tool crib attendants tooling technicians printers draftsmen maintenance clerks hydraulic specialists tool room machin ists electricians tool makers tool and die makers tool and die specialists mold repair foremen the materials control clerk the mate rials coordinator the materials buyer the tele phone operator the administrative clerk the warehouse inventory clerk accounting clerks purchasing buyers billing clerks the payroll clerk the registered nurse the computer oper ator office clerical employees and guards other professional employees and supervisors as defined in the Act (b) Post at its facility in Stratford Connecticut copies of the attached notice marked Appendix 4 Copies of the notice on forms provided by the Re gional Director for Region 34 after being signed by the Respondents authorized representative shall be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt and maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent * If this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States court of appeals the words in the notice reading Posted by Order of the Nation at Labor Relations Board shall read Posted Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board 360 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD to ensure that the notices are not altered defaced or covered by any other material (c) Notify the Regional Director in writing within 20 days from the date of this Order what steps the Respondent has taken to comply APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government The National Labor Relations Board has found that we violated the National Labor Relations Act and has ordered us to post and abide by this notice WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain with Bridgeport Fittings Employees Association as the exclusive representative of the employees in the bargaining unit WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with restrain or coerce you in the exer cise of the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act WE WILL on request bargain with the Union and put in writing and sign any agreement reached on terms and conditions of employment for former employees in the bargaining unit All production and maintenance employees in cluding leaders assemblers light machine op erators general laborers packing and inspect ing general machine operators material han dlers receiver/shippers heavy machine opera tors pot man machine operators and set up and machine operators and set up but exclud ing utilities employees factory clerks shipping clerks inspectors tool crib attendants tooling technicians printers draftsmen maintenance clerks hydraulic specialists tool room machin ists electricians tool makers tool and die makers tool and die specialists mold repair foremen the materials control clerk the mate rials coordinator the materials buyer the tele phone operator the administrative clerk the warehouse inventory clerk accounting clerks purchasing buyers billing clerks the payroll clerk the registered nurse the computer oper ator office clerical employees and guards other professional employees and supervisors as defined in the Act BRIDGEPORT FITTINGS INC